On Tue, 07 Dec 2010 14:45:45 +0100, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
Am 07.12.2010 14:40, schrieb Ionuț Bîru:
Hi, i come across https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/20261 and i see Dieter added support in aif for it but it needs to be added in core to include it on the cd.
That is not true. Packages don't have to be in core to be included in the installation environment.
I second this. If the reason for moving a package to core is that the installer cannot handle it otherwise the installer needs to be fixed.
Don't know why nobody assigned that bug to me since i'm the maintainer of nilfs-utils even since it was in community.
What do you think? Is it worth adding it? It must be in base group?
How many people use nilfs? I doubt very many. If you want to add another package to your list that nobody will sign off on, I don't object (even xfsutils and jfsutils rarely get signoffs, and those are popular file systems compared to nilfs).
That's why I would vote against moving it to core. I'd even say we should have a look at those packages in core with low usage and see if we should move them to extra. There are already packages for which we don't get any sign-offs which shows that those are no longer needed to be in core. The idea of core was to provide a minimal set of packages that are needed by nearly all users to set up a base system. Our sign-off procedure ensures that we don't put broken packages by accident there. I don't think that nilfs matches the criteria needed for inclusion in core. (side note: it has 1.38% usage according to pkgstats) Greetings, Pierre -- Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre